Clause 16
Finance Bill
3:45 pm
Paul Goodman (Shadow Minister (Childcare), Treasury; Wycombe, Conservative)
Members of the Committee will have received large numbers of representations about some clauses as they are of great interest to outside bodies. As a parliamentarian, one reads some clauses and finds one’s eyebrows rising. When I read the clause, I confess that I went to check the definition of a Henry VIII clause. I will return to that matter in a moment, but before I do, as members of the Committee will see on reading the clause, it empowers the Treasury to charge for community tradeable emissions allowances, which is reasonable enough. It states that the allowances will be allocated by regulation and the people who allocate them will be appointed by regulation. The regulations may impose fees, govern the making or forfeiting of deposits, impose penalties, charge interest on the recovery of penalties, and confer—and I presume withhold—rights of appeal relating to the forfeiting of deposits and the imposition of penalties.
The Financial Secretary is welcome to correct me if I am wrong, but I am not aware that I have seen the regulations yet. In summary, although the clause does not meet the definition of a Henry VIII clause, it does have a certain Tudor flavour. The breadth of its scope invites some questions. [Interruption.] I hear a learned, historical commentary from the Government Whip, but I will not please him by responding to it and compressing my remarks. Some of the simple questions surely are these: who will allocate the allowances; how high will the fees and the deposits be; how large will the penalties be; how much interest will be charged on recovered payments; and, above all, will there definitely be a right of appeal?
I expect the Financial Secretary to say that the answers will be provided in due course if the regulations have not already been published, but one point is clear about any regulations that either have been or will be published: they will not be amendable. No member of this or any Committee will be able to propose that the people who allocate the allowances should be different people or that the levels of fees, deposits, penalties or interest charged should be raised or lowered. Nor will any member of this or any Committee be able to debate the terms of any right of appeal. He or she may simply be faced with the choice of accepting or rejecting the proposals that emerge.
I say “may” be faced rather than “will” be faced with good reason. I have taken advice and I am told that the wording of the clause allows the Financial Secretary to choose either the positive or the negative procedure. That is, as it was put to me, unusual. In short, the proposals may not be considered by the positive procedure route, which is highly questionable.
If the regulations have not been published, when will they be? Can the Financial Secretary at least give the Committee an assurance—I gather that he is usually very reasonable in this regard—that they will be dealt with under the positive procedure, and can he give a guarantee that there will be a right of appeal, because that would seem to be important?